Slashdot Mirror
'Revenge Porn' Operator Gets 18 Years In Prison
Frosty Piss writes Kevin Christopher Bollaert, who operated a 'revenge porn' web site, was been found guilty in February of six counts of extortion and 21 counts of identity theft. He faced a maximum of 23 years in prison. On Friday, April 3rd, he was sentenced to 18 years in prison. The extortion charges stem from a second web site he ran that solicited payments of $250 to $350 from people who wanted to have the photographs deleted. Bollaert made about $30,000 on that site.
I realize that it is difficult to achieve a balance in fairness in sentencing but here we have an example of a court getting whacked out. Try and find a single case in which a drunk driver or hit and run driver who has killed someone gets 18 years in jail. Now it is obvious that no one likes to get a couple of hundred bucks ripped out of their wallets such a crime does not come close to killing someone and fleeing the scene. And i know that some people will say it involved more than one victim. But then again big tobacco and big coal kill a lot more than one person every single day and the law allows them to keep right on doing it. Worse yet as tobacco sales fell in the US our tobacco companies exported more and more tobacco to nations in which the population remains completely uneducated and allows children to smoke. The long and short of it is that both our civil and criminal justice systems need a rework from the ground up.
Quit watering down 'rape'. 'Violation'?
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
I agree with you. From what I can see the normal prison term for aggravated identity theft is five years and for extortion of $30,000 is about 2 years or a bit more depending on prior criminal record, so a five to seven year sentence would be normal and actually feels reasonable to me. There's no question that this guy's behavior was abominable and deserving of punishment, but the novelty of the offense is not an aggravating factor. It just triggers revulsion more powerfully than heinous acts we're more habituated to. It's natural when confronted with a novel offense to want to stamp it out, but it can't be done this way.
We'll probably never get past the notion that outrageous punishments deter crime, even though we see that proposition disproven every time we see people speeding through a section of highway posted for $500 construction zone fines. The fact that the sight of a car that looks like it might be a police cruiser makes people tap their brakes even in an ordinary speeding fine zone should tell us something. It's the likelihood of punishment that modifies people's behavior, not the magnitude. A $50 fine you think you'll probably get is more powerful than a $500 fine you believe you probably won't get.
What keeps this kind of futile draconian sentencing going is accepting the "well at least we're doing something" standard as good enough. If you think about it, that's a very low standard of performance. In fact it's not a standard of performance at all. Nothing could be simpler than passing a law mandating extremely harsh sentences or inflating sentences by gaming the sentencing guidelines in unusual ways but those actions aren't going to work and are arguably unconstitutional.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Yeah, it kinda was. It wasn't the cigarettes, it was the armed robbery.
Similarly, It wasn't the $30k, it was the extortion.
See what I mean?
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Since he blackmailed over 10,000 people that means he is serving less than 15 hours per instance. That's a substantial "bulk discount".
Probability of causing life-changing damage to victims: 100%.
Probability that as a result he would sooner or later be charged with serious financial and/or sexual crimes: close to 100%.
Probability that such crimes would result in a multi-year jail term on conviction: close to 100%.
Probability of achieving life-changing profits for self even under idealised conditions: close to 0%.
Even from a ruthless profit-making perspective, his odds of success were always negligible. This guy is a failure any way you look at it.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
As the person you responded to pointed out, we have an extreme imbalance in US courts dishing out sentencing. Politicians convicted of pretty much any charge get no jail time, where the laymen receive up to life in prison for identical charges. I am of course referring to retired General Petraeus who provided classified information to his girlfriend, while Bradley Manning is spending LIFE in prison for doing the same thing. The difference was in the people, not the crime..
Face the facts here, the courts wanted to make an "example" of this guy. That is called retribution, it is not called Justice.
Yeah, I agree that the guy did some slimy crap just to make a few bucks. That said, this sentence ensures the he will never be rehabilitated, ever. This is a demonstration of a failed system of justice, nothing more.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.